Mark `fn_to_numeric_cast` lints as MaybeIncorrect
At least for now so that `cargo fix --clippy` is not causing problems
with this lint. See #3896 for the remaining problems with the suggestions of this lint.
changelog: none
cc #3630, #3896
Don't nudge people towards toilet closures when producing owl results
`.map_err(drop)` should never be linted since sometimes you want to produce `Result<(), ()>` and the alternative is `.map_err(|_| ())`, which can be ugly. We don't seem to, but it's good to specifically test for this.
changelog: none
r? @yaahallo
trait bounds lint - repeated types
This PR is to tackle https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/3764 it's still a WIP and doesn't work but this is an initial stab. It builds though I haven't added any tests as I'm not sure where lint tests should go?
Unfortunately, it seems id isn't tied to the type itself but I guess where it is in the AST? Looking at https://manishearth.github.io/rust-internals-docs/syntax/ast/struct.Ty.html I can't see any members that would let me tell if a type was repeated in multiple trait bounds.
There may be other issues with how I've implemented this so any assistance is appreciated!
changelog: Add new lint: `type_repetition_in_bounds`
Bump version of clippy_dummy
The crates.io page of clippy still suggest to install `clippy-preview`
instead of `clippy` I think it's time to change this.
Thanks to the Stuttgart Meetup for discovering this!
r? @Manishearth could you also publish this after merging?
changelog: none
The crates.io page of clippy still suggest to install `clippy-preview`
instead of `clippy` I think it's time to change this.
Thanks to the Stuttgart Meetup for discovering this!
This lint adds warning if types are redundantly repeated in trait bounds i.e. `T: Copy, T: Clone` instead of `T: Copy + Clone`. This is a late pass trait lint and has necessitated the addition of code to allow hashing of TyKinds without taking into account Span information.
Ignore generated fresh lifetimes in elision check
<!--
Thank you for making Clippy better!
We're collecting our changelog from pull request descriptions.
If your PR only updates to the latest nightly, you can leave the
`changelog` entry as `none`. Otherwise, please write a short comment
explaining your change.
If your PR fixes an issue, you can add "fixes #issue_number" into this
PR description. This way the issue will be automatically closed when
your PR is merged.
If you added a new lint, here's a checklist for things that will be
checked during review or continuous integration.
- [ ] Followed [lint naming conventions][lint_naming]
- [ ] Added passing UI tests (including committed `.stderr` file)
- [ ] `cargo test` passes locally
- [ ] Executed `util/dev update_lints`
- [ ] Added lint documentation
- [ ] Run `cargo fmt`
Note that you can skip the above if you are just opening a WIP PR in
order to get feedback.
Delete this line and everything above before opening your PR -->
fixes#3988
changelog: Ignore generated fresh lifetimes in elision check.
**HELP**: It seems `tests/ui` are compiled under edition 2015, and I don't know how to add tests for this properly.
Here is the test input it had already passed:
```rust
#![feature(async_await)]
#![allow(dead_code)]
async fn sink1<'a>(_: &'a str) {} // lint
async fn sink1_elided(_: &str) {} // ok
async fn one_to_one<'a>(s: &'a str) -> &'a str { s } // lint
async fn one_to_one_elided(s: &str) -> &str { s } // ok
async fn all_to_one<'a>(a: &'a str, _b: &'a str) -> &'a str { a } // ok
// async fn unrelated(_: &str, _: &str) {} // Not allowed in async fn
// #3988
struct Foo;
impl Foo {
pub async fn foo(&mut self) {} // ok
}
// rust-lang/rust#61115
async fn print(s: &str) { // ok
println!("{}", s);
}
fn main() {}
```
Update pulldown-cmark to 0.5.3
Fixes a couple of crashes of which I added one example to our tests.
changelog: Update `pulldown-cmark` to 0.5.3 to fix potential crashes in `doc_markdown` lint
